It is a tough call to demarcate IDC as whether it is a non-practicing entity (NPE) or a practicing the art as many products companies do. NPE is solely for the purpose of licensing and NOT for practicing the art. NPE's motivation comes from litigating the IP! NPEs are NOT for transferring the technology!
I hope the proceeds from the sale of the IP will let IDC become a practicing entity!
USPTO search shows 1446 patents assigned to interdigital and 2282 applications (including those already granted). Assuming most of the 1700 are patents, it seems interdigital would have very little to offer after this purchase.
I suppose when a company is offering its patents for sale instead of licensing, it means its own self-valuation of those patents is already quite low, or else it is in a hurry to raise cash.
Patents on "common", i.e. widely used, technologies are the most valuable ones from a litigation perspective (whether they plan to play offense or defense). Intel seems to know what it is doing here. I am considering increasing my existing investment in Intel stock.
It makes me wonder if there is more to the purchase than is being reported. I have to agree that 3G is not the latest to the party technology and question if Intel really needed that or if they really bought it as part of a bundled larger portfolio purchase.
As we unveil EE Times’ 2015 Silicon 60 list, journalist & Silicon 60 researcher Peter Clarke hosts a conversation on startups in the electronics industry. Panelists Dan Armbrust (investment firm Silicon Catalyst), Andrew Kau (venture capital firm Walden International), and Stan Boland (successful serial entrepreneur, former CEO of Neul, Icera) join in the live debate.